http://xbox360.ign.com/articles/902/902768p1.html

Reviews so far

IGN gave it a 7.1


Other reviews------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

[Excerpts from IGN Review]Not really much a complaint there since it's your responsibility to manage the kind of relationship you have with various party members and equipping characters in a jrpg is never a bore and you don't necessarily need the most powerful stuff just enough to get the job done. That is true for Mass Effect as well. Not getting that complaint. You have as much interaction with the characters as you wish to.For a game they gave a 7.1 to, I don't see enough justification for the score in their written review. The review is not very well written. When you give a game a 7.1, you usually expect some more details. Sounds like the game got busted down for not being a graphical marvel, having some framerate hitches here and there and it having too many characters for the reviewer's liking, in addition to having to equip each of them with stuff.

I came here for awesome conspiracy theories and I see none >:(
What's wrong, Optimus? :P

//edit - conspiracy comments added. everything's fine :)

wooo. what a ouchful review..

Well im sure many expected more as i did. ill still be renting it (since i don't buy any games... and i mean any games... i don't own 1 game and iv had my 360 since the first day or ps3)

No conspiracy here just don't think the written review is properly reflective of a 7.1 game :)

There are many characters in the liberation army, some of which, can never be added to your main party, but can be put into sub parties. There are a lot of dialogue related stuff to fill in what you need to know about the various characters through the activating of private events and you can effect the various relationships depending on how you treat the characters.

szaromir read the review, I'm not talking about a conspiracy I'm simply saying that for a game they gave a 7.1 to, the review isn't reflective of such.

The reviewer also seems to have a positive view of the story and didn't feel the game was boring and the length of 25-30 hours is the same as it was in Valkyrie Profile 2 so a game of this length isn't anything new for a square enix published title.

http://www.famitsu.com/game/news/1217638_1124.html

Latest and likely last trailer for the game on famitsu :D

The best trailer yet !

http://xbox360.ign.com/dor/objects/821710/infinite...

IGN video review. At the end he recommends that people save their money for Tales of Vesperia, Fable 2 or Fallout 3.

Battle system looks fun to me and I can't believe the whining about lack of tons of CG cutscenes. Get over it. I hate to say it, but between the video review and the written review, I gotta wonder if he somehow doesn't know about the private events that can be initiated in the game between the main character and every single one of the 18 characters or how personality traits of characters have a direct impact on the gameplay or how certain characters have a liking or disliking for other characters and if you place a character in your party that isn't too well liked by someone else in your party, that will cause a specific party member or even multiple party members to have a stat decrease.

There may even be some characters that don't obey your every command. There is the force system that also deserves mention because of how it has a direct impact on gameplay and adds a nice bit of strategy to it. There is also the different abilities and their different properties from knock down to knock back or launch. The item creation ability from various characters. It should've also been mentioned that you can affect relationships with characters positively or negatively if you adhere to their requests to rest up a bit or you decide to check out their information and do things that will make them happy or make them angry.

The game also contains a way for you to order your ai teammates to do various things sorta like in tales of Vesperia. The written review also mentioned that you wouldn't want to use the other flute abilities? Players wouldn't want to use the flute to buff their party members abilities? Or help to protect everyone from magical attacks or to create a perfect clone of themselves that they can use to create a diversion and when enemies pounce on that diversion the clone blows up causing damage to them? Then there are the various ways that the enemy can detect you or you can confuse your enemy by shooting things down to create a noise or using potions to give off a certain smell... I'm also leaving out so much.

I just think that a lot of these things are things that if the reviewer took into consideration would automatically warrant the game receiving a better score unless of course every single one of the various game systems suck or the story is just terrible.

Only problem with that though is that none of these things are mentioned in either the video review or the text review and the reviewer actually believes the story is good and has a positive opinion of the main character. Did the equipping characters before you move off for battle and lack of cg cutscenes really piss him off this much? :P

Some of those things should have been talked about.

Sometimes I wonder if these reviewers have any idea how it is like to make a game? From my perspective these guys just yakity yak all the time. And as the saying goes...you can't spell ignorant without IGN.

Oh and I def understand being pissed about the performance. I wouldn't blame a reviewer for taking off serious points for the performance if they deem it that big a problem. From what I've seen though, that stuff won't take too much away from my enjoyment.

Some cutscenes aren't voiced, but from what I've seen so far anyway the non voiced cutscenes are scenes that are like a tutorial only tri-ace put more cutscene work into your typical tutorial than what I'm use to seeing.

A scene with no dialog was when the game was trying to teach you how to sneak up on enemies or distract or get the attention of enemies by shooting an apple from a tree.

The important things appear to be voiced.

You know Optimus, maybe sometimes the game just isn't all that great.

*prepares for half page rant*

Damn Optimus, always.

When a review of an RPG (or whatever ) you are expecting is lower than what is generally expected--by others and probably you--, you always have some excuses that ultimately convince yourself that what you are getting is an incredible game that is obviously underrated because the reviewer is either ignorant of some part of the game, they don't get it, they are biased, they are graphic whores, or they are simply not worthy.

"The graphics are underwhelming" (I think I pointed this out, I never understood what was so great about them, along with that other RPG)

Your typical/implied response to this is, "I don't care, I'm not even a graphics whore unlike them, in fact, I still play my N64"

Doesn't change the facts.

"The story is just forgettable", you respond "I like this kind of stories" Doesn't change the fact.

"X thing in the game is just badly implemented", you respond "Most likely they didn't even look at it, and just rushed through it to get the review out." Doesn't change the fact.

And this is in reference not to this game/review/thread only, it's just what I've gathered through time. I would understand if it was only a couple games, I think we all have that game that we know does so many things wrong and we still like a lot, a bad story yet we like it a lot, but every game? Suspiciously every game for which you are very hyped?

Meh.

lol, yeah, looking and reading about it, nothing seems to stand out about it, but i do think it looks pretty good. something i'd at least rent. 7.1 seems about right to me, above average just nothing that stands out enough to push it into "must buy" territory. its one im definately gonna check out tho.

the whole micro managment of characters is pretty crappy tho....YES, mass effect had something similar, but mass effect was also very refined and simple...bare bones if you will. you gave then a suit, and a few guns and they where happy. in this it seems far too complex, especially for the amount of characters you can have. maybe they should have just added a "auto" button to set everyone up with the best stuff for that character. would have made things a lot quicker.

You know Freniger, maybe my points are actually valid and you know next to nothing about the game in question to dispute anything of what I'm saying about things that IGN has completely neglected to mention in either the video or text review in regards to some of this game's most significant features.

I won't waste a giant rant on you because you really aren't worth the effort. I think your time would be much better spent in a thread for a game you care about or if you absolutely have to hang around and smell up the place then it would fantastic if you had something constructive to add as opposed to simply dropping in just to troll the game because you know it's a game I'm interested in.

Lebato and Korn, I apologize if you guys had something useful to say, but I didn't read any of it. You're both on ignore :)

i've noticed this as well.

theres a difference between thinking a game is good, and the game actually being good.

Wasnt really expecting much from this game, it looks really low budget, looks to be a decent game that i'll probably pick up in a bargain bin next year.

It looks like I might like this game. I usually like games that don't have a big budget. You never know what you'll get. :) or :(

AAA titles like GOW is a meh for me. GOW2 looks a lot better though.

"Did this guy just try to convince himself again? Then it's worst than I thought."

I don't know why some of you people are ganging on someone who doesn't share the same opinion as you. And some folks here have nothing better to say other than to critisize a game that they haven't played either. It's quite sad really...

Regardless, I'm still getting this game. Practically all the games that I liked got low review scores and I know better not to judge a game based on its review. I have enough information about IU to make an informed decision. While money is tight these days, I would still love this play this title, just like I'm getting Too Human today despite the horrid reviews that have been put out.

Some, not all are trying to get attention ;)

People talk about trends, but one big trend I seem to be noticing is the same people showing up solely to troll in threads for games I talk about haha.

Apparently Famitsu Xbox gave IU 34/40, Same score famitsu Xbox gave Tales of Vesperia.

2nd Review Score

Famitsu 34/40

Ummmm, it is the same score that ToV got. Interesting nonetheless. But we all know that famitsu scores are paid :P

I'll pick this one up i think, Ops one question on the battle system, can you pause and allocate actions for your squad to take?

I'm not too sure about this game...generally tri-ace makes the very best when it comes to jRPGs but then again...jrpgs suck noodle. Maybe i'll get it used or wait until it becomes cheap or until someone other than our forums official jrpg hyper-uper Optimus starts getting excited ^^

Hmmm as I thought, will still be getting the game, its not like I can be fussy where JRPG's come lately.

Nope it's 100% real-time, but then according to IGN, the AI characters do a great job of supporting you by healing and backing you up while you fight. They didn't give any hint that AI characters didn't do a good job of supporting you and then in the IGN video review they mention how characters can sometimes get in your way, but then when IGN says something like that, it would've been nice to see them also mention that you can alter the tactics for your party to change that. We've seen videos where your party is completely spread out and attacking without being in your way (the GC extended trailer that blim put up)

You can change the way your party behaves so you can approach situations any way you want. You can tell your party to

#1. move anyway they want
#2 split up and attack
#3 to concentrate on a single enemy
#4 you can tell them to stay back and wait
#5 you can set them to fight with the intention of starting or finishing any number of combos even chaining ones you've started.
#6 you can tell them to fight while conserving their MP.

It's one thing to say I'm hyping up a game as some have said, but when features like this are in a game, but then don't get mentioned once between 2 separate reviews isn't that something that deserves mention? The way some people act, you would think I was totally making up every single feature that I said was in in the game, but wasn't mentioned once in the IGN review. If they think it sucks then fine, at least tell us that the ability to issue tactics suck, don't just not mention it at all. I thought this was what they were paid to do as professional reviewers. The best piece of criticism in the entire thing is there is no block button, only a parry button, but naturally it's difficult to parry with good timing if the framerate is dipping. For the complaining done about equipping characters this game better have at least mass effect level customization. If it's as simple as giving them a new armor and a new weapon and the guy is complaining about that then I don't know what to say :P Also not a single mention of one of the game's biggest features, the situational battles. Not one mention in either the text or video review.

Who knows how it will be reviewed overall, but if the first review everyone got for TOV was the lowest Gaminformer review score, would people also be just as quick to suggest the game isn't good? I'm not a fan of allowing reviews to dictate what I think about games, my mind is generally made up before a single review is out as I'm sure is the game for quite a few others, but then I'm not a fan of living and dying by the opinion of a single reviewer either.

so when can i issue the above commands, can i issue them whilst in battle on the fly ?

I would assume so, otherwise it's totally impractical to go to the menu everytime to change this setting.